Of course, Bitcoin has a "political" component, and really it is challenging (or disrupting as some might describe it) the idea about the extent to which government and money should be separate.
It is NOT a given that the theoretical concept that government and money should be separate is true because there has never really been any system of such, ever... at least not in the modern world and no where near on the world-wide scale that bitcoin attempts to accomplish.
Ultimately, I agree that bitcoin seems to be providing a kind of neutral opportunity for a money system that is somewhat separate from any government's ability to control it - but it surely is neither a given that bitcoin is going to be successful (or the winner in such regard) nor that various governments are not going to make systematic attempts to battle it, in the event that they figure out that they are losing any kind of meaningful control over it.
The possible government jostling for position in regards to bitcoin could well take more than 50 years to play out, in spite of the already seemingly fast growth of bitcoin, there could still be some significant battles along the way - and even a decent amount of coordination attempts between jurisdictions regarding how to "deal with" this bitcoin matter.
Surely, I am not asserting that bitcoin is going to fail because of these expected ongoing battles, and
au contraire, I anticipate that current and future BTC investors are likely going to prosper stupendously (in financial and self-empowering ways) because of their ongoing investment in bitcoin, despite likely ongoing battles between status quo government and financial institutions and in spite of likely ongoing volatility that remains almost inevitable to go in both ways because of such battles and also because of the volatility of adoption of new (never before seen) systems around bitcoin.
(where do you keep finding your walls of text)
